MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774895970 · doi:10.1071/rdv30n1ab12

12 Ovulation Timing Following an Aromatase Inhibitor-Based Synchronization Protocol in Beef Heifers and Cows

2017· article· en· W2774895970 on OpenAlexaffabout
E. M. Zwiefelhofer, Will Lillico, Gregory P. Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvulationLetrozoleCorpus luteumAromatase inhibitorEstrous cycleLactationFollicleFollicular phaseAndrologyMedicineInternal medicineEndocrinologyAnimal scienceHormoneBiologyPregnancyAromatase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study was conducted to determine the effects of parity/lactation and the timing of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) treatment on the efficacy of a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor-based synchronization protocol in cattle. Results from previous studies confirmed drug-release from a new letrozole-impregnated intravaginal silicone device, which was used in the present study. Hereford-cross cows with suckling calves (41 to 65 days postpartum; n = 30) and sexually mature heifers (n = 30), at random stages of the oestrous cycle, were given a letrozole intravaginal device for 4 days followed by a luteolytic dose of prostaglandin F2a (PGF2a). Following PGF2a treatment, animals were assigned randomly to 3 groups and given GnRH (100 µg of gonadorelin) intramuscularly at 48 or 60 h, or no GnRH (n = 10 cows and 10 heifers per group). Ovaries were examined by transrectal ultrasonography every 8 h starting at the time of PGF2a treatment to record follicle diameter and ovulation. After ovulation, ultrasonography was done every 24 h until Day 10 (Day 0 = ovulation) to assess the corpus luteum (CL) diameter profile. The timing of ovulation, diameter of the preovulatory follicle, synchrony of ovulation, and Day-7 CL diameter were compared using two-way ANOVA, and CL diameter profiles were compared by two-way ANOVA for repeated measures. There was no treatment × parity/lactation status interaction for any endpoint. The ovulation rate within 96 h of PGF2a treatment was not different between heifers and cows (24/30 v. 27/30; P = 0.14) or treatment group (18/20, 18/20, and 15/20 in the 48 h, 60 h, and no GnRH groups, respectively; P = 0.18). The interval from PGF2a treatment to ovulation was not influenced by parity/lactation (83.1 ± 2.4 h) but was shortest in the GnRH 48 h group (mean ± SEM; 74.2 ± 2.7 h, 85.6 ± 4.8 and 89.2 ± 4.1, respectively; P < 0.05). Similarly, the variation in the interval to ovulation (mean ± s.e.M of residuals) was not influenced by parity/lactation (16.0 ± 2.0 h), but was lower in the GnRH groups than the no-GnRH group (P < 0.01), and tended to be lower (P = 0.1) in the GnRH 48-h v. 60-h group (10.0 ± 2.8, 14.2 ± 3.5, and 24.1 ± 3.1 h, respectively). The maximum diameter of the ovulatory follicle was larger for cows than heifers (17.0 ± 0.4 v. 15.1 ± 0.5; P < 0.01), and was smaller in the GnRH groups than the no-GnRH group (15.3 ± 0.3, 15.4 ± 0.7 and 17.3 ± 0.5 mm, respectively; P < 0.01). The diameter of the CL on Day 7 was larger for cows than heifers (22.3 ± 0.8 v. 20.2 ± 0.6 mm; P < 0.05) and was influenced by treatment (21.9 ± 0.5, 19.5 ± 0.7, 22.3 ± 1.1 mm, respectively; P = 0.05). A tendency for a treatment effect on CL diameter profile (P = 0.1) was attributed to a smaller profile in the GnRH 60-h group. In conclusion, GnRH treatment 48 h after PGF2a treatment increased synchrony of ovulation without adverse effects on ovulating follicle diameter or resulting CL growth, and may be incorporated into a novel steroid-free oestrous synchronization protocol for use in beef heifers and lactating cows. Research was supported by the Alberta Livestock and Meat Agency and Vencofarma, Brazil.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.451
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and DevelopmentSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207